Total posts: 3,178
Posted in:
-->
@Vaarka
What do you think of EthanG townreading Danielle(now Pie2) Dp1 when they hadn't even made a post yet? Still continues to remain sus all this time later. Plus EthanG disappears after DP1. I think he got pissed that he was alone as scum and checked out of the game tbh 😂😂.
Created:
Posted in:
theres no way in hell there are 2 cops bro
Ahhhh, and I suppose everyone else should just take ur word for it that ur doc? Vaarka and Hammer arent making an absurd point. Even last DP you were all down for lynching Drafter. There was little to no incentive to kill Drafter as mafia, leaving him alive would've likely resulted in his lynch today.
Nah, I think Ethan TR'ing Danielle(now you) out of nowhere, for no discernible reason as no posts has been made by Danielle, DP1 was a big indicator that y'all are affiliated and not in the good way. Cause townies don't generally call someone town who at that point had made zero posts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Snerp heads back upstairs while the muscle of the group handles the clean-up.
He approaches Donavich
Do you have holy wafers handy by chance? We'll need them to make sure your son doesn't regenerate and remain alive once we bury him. He may be a vampire, but he doesn't deserve to be buried alive for eternity, of that I think we can both agree.
I'm sure the Morninglord will take mercy on him. It wasn't his fault he was turned, it was Strahds. Your son was but a victim to his evil machinations.
(On a side note this game totes convinced me to get the clre rule books and start up a group with friends again 👏👏.)
Created:
Posted in:
however I recall Snerp mentioning a need to remove their heads,
(Remove the head, fill mouth with holy wafers, stake body and bury body and head separately.)
Created:
Posted in:
How do you feel about our inactives? Specifically Pie(2) and Hammer?
It's possible that Hammer is bussing Pie right now, that's for sure. But it seems like Pie(2) might very well be scum. I don't think there is a protective role. W/2 cops and 1x tracker in an 8 player game, doctor would be OP at that point.
As maf if i saw 2 legit cop claims and a flipped 1x track I'd prob end up claiming doc thinking at that point a doc wouldn't be in the game.
Created:
Posted in:
Kanaugh confirmation passed cloture.
Collins, Flake, vote yes along with 1 Democrat being Manchin. Collins says she will announce how she will vote in the actual confirmation vote @3pm.
Murkowski is a no vote. Just means she's getting booted out next time she's up for re-election 😂. Manchin and Flake are likely both yes votes, though haven't given indication they will vote in the same manner as during cloture.
My guess is it ends up at 51-49 or 50-50 w/Kavanaugh being confirmed. If i had to bet, it'd be that Pence has to cast the deciding vote in this.
Created:
Posted in:
I'll be at a funeral and with family most of the day. I'll be back tonite at latest 👍
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
(I'm gonna be at all funeral and likely unavailable most of the day. So I'll submit this last action and then leave what I do up to the group in the interim.)
Snerp draws his bow,
I'm sorry this has to be done Donavich but Strahd has forced our hand. Rest assured we will be taking him down.
He then runs back downstairs and casts vicious mockery on Doru, focusing it with his lute.(Cast Vicious Mockery on Doru.)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
(The affliction is also removed upon a long rest. Vampire also healed the amount of necrotic damage dealt.
So we're at 51 dealt by us. No clue on how much damage Ismarck is dealing.)
Created:
Posted in:
I got an inno EthanG, but pretty clear at least Drafter was flavored at this point. Vaarka is right that it makes little sense for me to kill Drafter as mafia. Vaarka thought we were both town, Ethan had been SR'ing him, and Pie was down for his lynch if there was a no kill.
A lynch on me was unlikely to happen if Drafter remained alive basically. And as I pointed out, there was a slim possibility that we were both cops and mafia would take the opportunity to clear one of us out.
I'm thinking I might be naive and Drafter was insane/paranoid.
Created:
Posted in:
I'd sure like to see RBG replaced by ACB(Amy Comey Barrett 👏).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vortex86
Yep, also this whole thing has pretty much assured a hardcore conservative is being nominated if another seat opens. And Trump's prolly gonna start throwing less moderate ones in other courts too. Which is good cause Obama straight packed that shit with far less than milk-toast leftists.
Case in point, the recent judge that overruled a Trump order to end refugee status for certain countries. "CaUsE iT sO RaCiSt."
Created:
Posted in:
This circus is gonna backfire on Dems. Seat Battles are starting to flip and election interest for conservativescis increasing in key battles. Trump campaigning in those places might have something to do with that too 😏. People knock on Trump, they fail to see he is the key.
If Kavanaugh isnt voted in, its gonna cause conservatives to double down and imho flip the general trend of the opposing party taking back at least the house.
Maybe some Dems flip too seeing that potential start to develop the more time passes that this goes on?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vortex86
and you have Manchin saying he's basically a yes vote. It is all but decided.
👏 Hello Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh 💯
Created:
Posted in:
FBI background investigation is in, sources in white house reporting that the assessment isn't just that Kavanaugh didn't do it, but also apparently that nothing at all probably happened.
As was predictable, the supplemental FBI investigation that was begged for is a "joke" now 😂😂.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
@bsh1
If today passes and Danielle doesn't post sign-ups she'll be back on hold and Virt goes with sign-ups 👍
Dudz game is about to hit DP3 so it's prolly close to ending. At that point if Danielle doesn't come back Bsh1 posts sign-ups 👍
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
(oh, wow, I i just derped on both questions lol)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Earth
(Are we up to 35 points dealt to him? He has about 70 health on him.)
(38 damage so far I think)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
(Why do I still have 3 level 1 spell slot? I used faerie fire and it's a level 1 spell no?
Also, if it failed, so I'm concentrating on a failed spell? 😮 I mean, I'm not complaining, just confused lol)
Created:
Posted in:
(Whoaaaaaa, Ireena needs to not stay behind or be alone.)
Noticing that Ireena is not with the group, Snerp dashes back upstairs.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
@kindertina
(Right, it was precisely what we were lacking in the most . Now we have a solid AF group all around imho 💯)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheHammer
@Vaarka
So either he was being truthful with that analysis, or he was contriving it. If he was being truthful, then sus'ing me is inconsistent with that. If he was contriving it, well uh, that's a pretty clear scum tell
To clarify. I dont want it to appear as if his "sus" of me refers to his sus today. Rather his proposed sus'ing of me yesterday throughout the DP despite TR'ing me in posting. Either he contrived that sus, or his investigation isn't consistent with his reads because it was genuine.
He's either admitting he contrived his scumhunting, a clear tell, but not the sole or even main reason why he's scummy. Or he investigated a town read as cop. Which uhhh, I can understand a null, but investigating a TR?
Inb4- "my sus of you throughout D1 was because of gut instinct/intuition."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheHammer
@Vaarka
So VTNL obviously, someone give me the TL;DR on why this hasn't happened yet
It's not VTNL obviously.
Refer to post 167 and 171 for why it's not "obvious" and for why Drafter has made it pretty clear he's scum.
If you hold it's more likely there is only one cop, then realize we're right back at this same point tomorrow. Sure, more results. But the results from Drafter and I will still be untrustable, and any new results that outright confirm either of is are suspect inherently because regardless of what happens, we will still be at MYLO and one mislynch away from a loss.
Though it is true results could break in towns favor, assume Drafter is town for a moment. Has it really broke in his favor? Except for him am I even being scum read? This ignoring his only supplied reasoning for SR'ing me is that I'm deviating from SoP.
But Vaarka expressed desire to deviate from SoP. I'm failing to see the scum read for that. Pie is open to deviating, all three of us being scum seems rather implausible. So what does that make of the validity of his original supplied reasoning? Its bunk, he obviously knows this because it's not producing reads consistent with that. Yet here he is still SR'ing me.
"Cause of muh guilty"
He says, which ignores that town behavior in conjunction with an opposite result is indicative of being flavored. As he has said though, his read of me being scum has never wavered. Despite town reading me last DP because
"He's doing much the same thing I am, so I can't scum read him" or something very similar to that.
So either he was being truthful with that analysis, or he was contriving it. If he was being truthful, then sus'ing me is inconsistent with that. If he was contriving it, well uh, that's a pretty clear scum tell.
The signs clearly point to Drafter being scum and me town, or neither of us being scum as a slim probability fmpov. But if the latter is true, we're pretty much fucked anyways fmpov cause regardless of who is lynched the other is subsequently lynched and town loses anyways.
I'm not gonna be SR'ing anyone if they choose otherwise cause that itself isn't indicative of affiliation. I'm just saying, we're making this same decision again tomorrow regardless. And though there is a potential of additional results clearing things up, there's an equal possibility of further results obfuscating that clarity and or shading that "clarity" in a direction that results in town losing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
and TR'd him despite there being no posts from EthanG to hold him as scum
Sorry, to clarify, he SR'd him despite there being no new information regarding EthanG to change his final D1 assessment of him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
All I'm saying is what if new information comes out
And if it does, which will happen regardless with a VTNL with two cops claims, then are those results going to be any more trustable?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Idk, GP and EthanG were my two SR's but GP was wrong. I'm still thinking Ethan tbh cause Drafter came out and TR'd him despite there being no posts from EthanG to hold him as scum.
Seemed like the kind of harmless pressure, just like the RVS pressure of him early on, that's typical of scum so as to safely distance from each other with minimal risk.
Can acknowledge this could just be Drafter trying to manufacture analysis. And, being it seems what is and is not an easy lynch is something he brought up, it's safe to say he probably wouldn't have SR'd a relative of total inactive(Vaarka/Danielle(You) would have been too easy.
I'm not even convinced your town tbh, or Vaarka, or Hammer. I'm in a position yet again where one of my SR's popped up as town. And someone I was strong TR'ing is most likely scum. So I'm unsure of whether it might be time to go back to the drawing board on analysis metrics.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
The previous statement, which Walsh released to CNN and the committee last week, said, "Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford
The allegation is that Kavanaugh did it. She hasn't deviated from denying knowing Kavanaugh and stills is not corroborating her story.
However, the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate it because she has no recollection of the incident in question."
- "I don't know that person"
- "I don't recall that incident"
Again, the allegation is that Kavanaugh did it. Zero of the people corroborate anything with her account and it's riddled with inconsistencies. This is that same standard of evidence issue where you are presuming guilt off of nothing, preventing you from realizing the lack of evidence that ties Kavanaugh to a crime that hasn't been proven as being committed in the first place, let alone proving a specific perpetrator.
Ford could have been assaulted at some place, at some time, by some person, and it not have anything do with Kavanaugh. Imagine that 😂😂
And, so her best friend walked back her statement without actually walking it back. You act like her best friend going, "I believe her despite not knowing Kavanaugh and not remembering this party" is some sort of damning evidence when it's not evidence of anything.
Plenty of people who directly know and have worked with Kavanaugh are stating they believe him. Guess that makes him innocent by your own logic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Im still not understanding on how a VTNL is beneficial to mafia
It puts the control of pieces on the board and variables in place back into the hands of mafia for the most part. New results are just as untrustable as old ones. You yourself are willing to lynch Drafter despite him having a guilty on me.
Would you think otherwise if a watcher came out and pegged me as scum too? If so that would be inconsistent with it being a sensible course of action that still leaves town choosing between a baseline 50/50 tomorrow and pretends it still won't be the same situation of a loss upon a mislynch.
What about if there is a no kill and there is a doc claiming they saved Drafter? Can you guarantee there are even protective roles in the game so as to assume that doc is legit?
"Find the other scum cause someone is a partner and that will bring another variable into the equation."
And this would be possible anyways if we lynched scum today. In fact, such a scum lynch would conclusively tell protective roles who they should be protecting.
It leaves the door open to more variables and information tomorrow
Either these variables will still be present because they are not Drafter or I. Or they are untrustable until one of us is confirmed as town. Either way, this idea of "more variables and information" assumes that presented variables will be genuine.
Yet this situation itself is an example on how results are not always genuine and can often be faked. What precludes there from being no additional PR's than a cop and 1x tracker? Can you guarantee there are any more PR's? I sure can't, so who's to say town even gets genuine results to work with beyond results that are already thrown into question by a quasi-CC.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
but yeah, certainly does fit the definition doesn't it lol
Fits it exactly actually 😂
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
And remember when talking to Budda, his reasoning is that Mafia won't NK tonight
That they're not likely to.
That basically means town gets a free round of investigations tonight if we NL.
Yes, but this also kinda assume any additional results that comes forth is somehow going to be trustable. Mafia is one lynch away from a win. It's totally not overboard for a fake result to be produced tomorrow to obfuscate things even further.
Acting like waiting a night can only ever result In beneficial effects for town, is disingenuous to the choice being made and the potential scenarios that play out tomorrow.
Example: I'm a watcher and I saw X visiting the player who was killed!
I'm a doctor and made the save(something thats generally paired with a no kill gambit.)
All results that are just as untrustable as the current results on the board. Both mine and his. Again, VTNL'ing basically hands control of the pieces on the board and the variables present right back into mafias hands.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
VTNL'ing just puts the game back in the hands of mafia. Appeals to additional results ignores that neither me nor Drafter can be trusted and we'll be right back to this same choice tomorrow.
Probably with no additional deaths and neither Drafter nor me dying fmpov. This assumes Drafter is scum for the following reasons:
1) Drafters analysis has been disgenuinely shading posts and/or blatantly lying about said posts.
2) His first and initial analysis on me was mainly WIFOM of the night kill and absurd voting behavior analysis. When voting analysis actually illustrates the very clear potential that his pressure of EthanG was to distance himself falsely during RVS when pressure rarely is being placed for a lynch, and the lynch on you was a counterwagon to scum being lynched. Note EthanG was scum reading drafter, but final VC has his vote on you, for bunk reasons, just like Drafters reasoning was bunk.
This means he not only has admitted to buddying me, but also clearly bw'd EthanG when voting to lynch you. So he's gonna vote with someone he was still obviously sus of despite indicating otherwise. BW'ing with a sus read? Yeah, he's totally paying attention to voting behavior and his analysis has been totally genuine 😂.
3) In conjunction with the previous. His rescinding of sus'ing Ethan in favor of you was based off of the same type of disgenuine analysis. Now he SR's EthanG again this DP despite zero else being present regarding EthanG
4) Tomorrow will be the same situation where if town gets the lynch wrong, they lose.
Evidence points to Drafter being scum heavily fmpov. VTNL'ing isn't gonna change the choice. It does however allow for mafia to control the pieces on the board when the choice is made.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
what would you call that?
I'd call those lies and that person a liar my dude 👏👏
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
his overall demeanor during his testimony indicates he is more angry at being found out than he is regretful at what probably happened
First off, your standard events evidence is atrocious regarding criminal allegations.
Secondly, what about the allegations makes it likely to have happened?
Her inconsistent accounts?
The lies she's being caught in?
The fact that nobody who she's named can corroborate the story and her best friend downright refutes it?
Like I said, the standard of evidence you have is atrocious AF 😂😂😂
Created:
Posted in:
I could understand if no killing was just a generally foreign concept totally unknown to the game in general. But it's not. The concept of no killing is common knowledge. From there it's only basic mathematical probabilities to realize killing at MYLO helps town and harms mafia unless very specifically conditions are present, such as being an open set-up game, you can guarantee it's a true CC, can guarantee there is a doc in the game, and there is a player present that if killing, would greatly advantage scum in their death.
As stated, at one point there were no passing plays in football. The concept itself was considered absurd and preposterous. By your reasoning because no AFL games used passing plays, that passing plays in football should never have been used because it lacked in game substantiation to hold it was possible.
This is erroneous tho because the only thing that's relevant to whether or not something is possible in a game is whether or not it breaks the rules. Passing never broke any rules in football, stodgy and specious fools like you just held it was absurd to even consider, despite it not actually being against any rules and mathematically far smarter than running purely HB run plays and sweep options with the HB and Quarterback.
Yet here we are today. With an NFL that is primarily focused on passing the ball as opposed to running. Almost as if theorycrafting can and often does trump past behaviors.
Particularly in mafia, where future collaborations will always trump past behaviors.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
If you're going against a team that always plays a given strategy, no amount of back-of-the-napkin scribblings is going to convince a coach that they are magically going to behave in the exact opposite way
Except this isnt what's happening here. This isnt the same team(players) with the same coach and the same front office establishing a track record over time. It's you trying to present that various teams have always done this, as a reason for why it could never happen here.
This is bullshit. The practice of fouling in basketball when a player is driving the lane was a result of theorycrafting. The practice of fouling at end game when down, a result of theorycrafting.
The practice of going for it on 4th down in football when inside the opponents 50, was a result of theorycrafting.
Smallball in baseball, something that has encompassed the entire sport at this point and is attributed as being the chief reason why the Oakland Athletics as a small market team even won the world series they recently did, was entirely theorycrafting off mathematical probabilities and statistics.
All of these were once back of the napkin scribblings that are now the standard, specifically because the theorycrafting itself orginally bore out the truth and sensibility of those theories.
Last i checked, you don't have any evidence put forth that no killing isnt generally beneficial to mafia at MYLO. Just that, "oh they've never no killed here at MYLO."
Well I'll tell you what. At one point in football nobody had run a pass play, despite it being totally legal. The first teams that started doing so saw huge success.
Nobody in football at one point had run a flea flicker, end-around, or statue of liberty. Worked great as a consequence the first few times because of the exact kind of thinking you are using, that being.
"It hasn't happened here yet, so it's just not gonna happen"
Depsite the benefits of such plays being obvious, just from that opinion alone.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Earth
(keep in mind I'm running ahead to Thunderwave, perhaps hold back while I do then rush in after it's resolved next round? That way you don't caught up in it and take 3d8 thunder damage and get knocked prone 😂😂)
Created:
Posted in:
If you wanna present like ur trying to play to win the game, arguing against a fundamental part of creating optimal strategies to winning a game is nonsensical.
No, i find it more likely you are actually playing to win the game. But ur playing to win the game as scum. I'm not gonna assume ur stupid and don't comprehend this. Instead I'm going to assume you actually do comprehend this fully and ur arguments are coming out ur rear.
You are free to correct me otherwise at any time regarding this comprehension.
Created:
Posted in:
To continue the basketball example. Your position would be the same as, "fouls are bad because they send the opposing player to the line for free shots" that would be the position that doesn't factor in mathematical probabilities and optimal game strategies.
Meanwhile I would be telling my team, "if they drive the paint, foul them and foul them hard. Make them think twice and hesitate to drive the lane. Also, they're gonna be shook when they take those free throws and miss one or both unless they're cold blooded and don't care about that contact."
Guess what, the second, and actually optimal strategy in most cases, is a result of theorycrafting 👏👏. The first observation is facially correct, but actually abysmal if you are trying to win the game.
Created:
Posted in:
Do i think we're both cop? No, unlike ur WIFOM, shoddy vote analysis, and blatant misrepresentation of my posts. I actually, given the above, have reasons to hold you as scum.
Because that vote analysis paints you as scummy as previously outlined. And your latant misrepresentations and reliance on WIFOM is itself indicative of you manufacturing your read on me.
Case in point
Saying im scum siding because I pointed out what are basic mathematical deductions, themselves the basis for theorycrafting.
And if you honestly think theorycrafting has no part to play in winning a game. I again, challenge you to put together a basketball team that doesn't know how basketball is played and the strategies of the game. While I put together a team that does, and watch as the team you put together gets trounced 100% of the time.
Created:
Posted in:
*this assumes both a successful scum-lynch the proceeding DP, but also assumes a doc save in cojunction. Once ur at MYLO ur stuck there at best unless you lynch scum AND get a doc save..
VTNL'ing itself does not cause that extra night, nor does it provide town with an additional mislynch in itself. Nor does it provide town any better probabilities than already present in a 1/2(50%) "CC".
This is why in classic set-up you VTNL. Because you can guarantee it's a true CC in whuch there is only one cop. And you can guarantee there is a doctor in the game that has 1/4 odds of protecting the NK target.
Neither of those two can be guaranteed here. Nor, again, does no-killing or VTNL'ing itself cause an extra mislynch. The risks are there, but they're minimal in closed set-ups.
Just like there is a minimal risk we're both town, and VTNL'ing presents the opportunity for scum to kill one of us, leading to the lynch of the other and a town loss. If the above is scummy because I disregarded such risks as minimal, then you are doubly scummy for disregarding the risk of both of us being cop. Especially since, unlike the risks of no-killing which require a doc save in conjunction with a successful lynch for those risks to come to fruition.
The only thing that need be true here is we are both cops. Nothing else need happen in conjunction for that to backfire. So arguably the risks is less minimal than the risks of no-killing, although arguing still in the "minimal" range.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
despite the fact that I was pushing for the NL before he revealed this unbeatable scum-sided strategy
First off, I never claimed it's unbeatable. And just because you VTNL'd before makes you town because? I also assumed you were intelligent enough to deduce probabilities so if anything you not pointing out that scum could no kill is itself actually scummy.
Either you don't comprehend basic probabilities, or you decided those basic probabilities should be left undivulged.
I must have missed the part where hiding prescient information like that from town is the towny thing to do.
Not to mention, that's not why I'm finding you scummy. But please do keep blatantly lying about my posts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
So, even if you aren't scum, you are basically scum-siding.
No, I figured people here were intelligent enough to understand killing at MYLO is sub-optimal play.
Wow the guy who points out this could backfire and be a lead-in to a gambit has to be scum because? So devilishly evil of me making town aware of no killimg as opposed to not being so and coming into next DP totally trusting a doc save claim with no NK.
I must have missed the part in games where hiding important information from town was a towny thing to do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
And notice, readers, how the scum goes from "This is 100% SOP
Here is that inability to comprehend what a question mark signifies again.
that is mathematically proven to be the superior strategy
It actually has been, hence why the cats been let out of the bag.
To "well, it's never actually happened before, but it might!"
Happened "here" before. But again, SoP used to be VTNL on D1 unless scum slip. Its now no longer.
What reason do you have to believe that this sudden 180 on typical DDO scum behavior is going to happen right here, right now?
Idk, maybe cause i outlined mathematically that unless
-we're both cops
Or
-there is a specific player it would hugely benefit them to kill
Actually killing someone in this situation benefits town, while harming mafia? And mafia would sensibly no kill?
Sorry for letting the cat out of the bag on that one. I could see why you might want to cling to that SoP cause it largely benefits towns base win probability while hurting mafias base win probability.
Shit dude, my b for thinking players could comprehend simple probabilities for themselves and assuming people here we're otherwise aware of the no killing at MYLO. Especially since it was a specific topic of discussion during a beginners series game.
I guess according to you i gave players on DDO too much credit for being able to deduce basic probabilities.
Created:
Posted in:
Your argument literally depends on DDO players suddenly and spontaneously deciding to adopt that gambit - out of nowhere
Also, as I've pointed out twice now, it wouldn't be out of nowhere. I let the cat out of the bag on that one.
No shit, sherlock. That's exactly my point. What matters is actual gameplay.
Except, again, by this same logic SoP being VTNL should still be the standard. It took convincing people in game of the merits of lynching D1 as a standard to even get people to consider lynching D1 even some of the time barring a slip.
Before it was implemented, all there was was theorycrafting on it and examples from other mafia communities.
This is presenting a false dichotomy and a false standard of behavior thats inconsistent with how games evolve over time. It took months of pushing for D1 lynches in game for it to start being done barring a scum slip.
This whole notion that analyzing game mechanics and optimal strategies in a game is "clogging" the DP and is pointless is delusional to how important that is to the game itself.
Unless you want to argue that analyzing game mechanics and optimal strats to victory doesn't increaae odds of winning.
But at that point sure thing. Let's put together two separate basketball teams. Make sure none of the players on ur team understand optimal basketball strategy or mechanics/rules. While I'll make sure all my players do. Now watch as the team I put together spanks yours 100% of the time.
Ur angle is so lul and antithetical to playing games/competing to win.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Your argument literally depends on DDO players suddenly and spontaneously deciding to adopt that gambit - out of nowhere
Ah, so because something has never been done in a particular location that means it will never happen. Shit i have to wonder how we have any technology at all today considering before it was made and implemented, tech hadn't been used anywhere.
Such as irrigation. By this logic, irrigiation should be nonexistent because it wasn't done anywhere until it started being done.
By your logic, no lynches have ever occurred on DP1, because at one point it was SoP here and what was done was VTNL'ing. But yet, here we are with that SoP no longer being strict SoP and D1 lynches happen often.
Created: